A Left defense of UBI (2019). This article argues that people will use UBI funds rationally but that it won’t solve the underlying structural causes of poverty.

On the economics of a UBI (2017). This article calls the proposal a UBI, but it really agues for a guaranteed minimum income — as income decreases the cash transfer would increase. There are some useful cards in here

— robots will kill the tax base now
— a VAT is better than a robot tax
— We should support radical change.

Pro — Proposals

In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State (book) (2016) America’s population is wealthier than any in history. Every year, the American government redistributes more than a trillion dollars of that wealth to provide for retirement, health care, and the alleviation of poverty. We still have millions of people without comfortable retirements, without adequate health care, and living in poverty. Only a government can spend so much money so ineffectually. The solution is to give the money to the people This is the Plan, a radical new approach to social policy that defies any partisan label. Murray suggests eliminating all welfare transfer programs at the federal, state, and local levels and substituting an annual $10,000 cash grant to everyone age twenty-one or older. In Our Hands describes the financial feasibility of the Plan and its effects on retirement, health care, poverty, marriage and family, work, neighborhoods and civil society.

In 2010, troubled by watching families chase the now-elusive American Dream, Andy Stern began a five-year journey to investigate how technology will impact jobs and the future of work. Stern, formerly the head of the nation’s most influential and fastest-growing union, the Service Employees International Union, investigated these issues with a wide range of CEOs, futurists, economists, workers, entrepreneurs, and investment bankers who are shaping the future.

The sobering assessment that emerged from his research-across the political spectrum, from libertarians at the CATO Institute to the leaders of the progressive left-is that this time is different: there will be meager benefits that come with full-time work and fewer good jobs overall. Facing such a challenging moment, Stern’s solution is fittingly bold: to establish a universal basic income by eliminating many current government programs and adding new resources. At once vivid, provocative, and pragmatic, Raising the Floor will spark a national conversation about creating the new American Dream.

Fair Shot: Rethinking Inequality and How We Earn (2018). Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes makes the case that one percenters like him should pay their fortune forward in a radically simple way: a guaranteed income for working people. The first half of Chris Hughes’ life played like a movie reel right out of the “American Dream.” He grew up in a small town in North Carolina. His parents were people of modest means, but he was accepted into an elite boarding school and then Harvard, both on scholarship. There, he met Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin Moskovitz and became one of the co-founders of Facebook. In telling his story, Hughes demonstrates the powerful role fortune and luck play in today’s economy. Through the rocket ship rise of Facebook, Hughes came to understand how a select few can become ultra-wealthy nearly overnight. He believes the same forces that made Facebook possible have made it harder for everyone else in America to make ends meet. To help people who are struggling, Hughes proposes a simple, bold solution: a guaranteed income for working people, including unpaid caregivers and students, paid for by the one percent. The way Hughes sees it, a guaranteed income is the most powerful tool we have to combat poverty and stabilize America’s middle class. Money―cold hard cash with no strings attached―gives people freedom, dignity, and the ability to climb the economic ladder. A guaranteed income for working people is the big idea that’s missing in the national conversation. This book, grounded in Hughes’ personal experience, will start a frank conversation about how we earn in modern America, how we can combat income inequality, and ultimately, how we can give everyone a fair shot.

Mason, P. (2016) Postcapitalism: A Guide to Our Future. This book argues a UBI will be part of a post-work world that is rather utopian.

. Atlas Nods: The Libertarian Case for a UBI (2017). This Article seeks to answer that question. We first show that a basic safety net is not only consistent with, but likely required by, several (though not all) strands of libertarian thought. We then explain why libertarians committed to limited redistribution and limited government might support a system of unconditional cash transfers paid periodically. Delivering benefits in cash, rather than in-kind, furthers autonomy by recognizing that all citizens—even poor ones—are the best judges of their needs. Decoupling such transfers from a work requirement acknowledges that the state lacks the ability to distinguish between work-capable and work-incapable individuals. Providing payments periodically, rather than through a once-ina-lifetime lump-sum grant, ensures that all individuals can receive a minimum level of support over lifespans of variable lengths, while also allowing individuals to adjust payment flows through financial market transactions.

UBI will change welfare (2019). This article argues that UBI should replace welfare, contending it removes the disencentives to work.

The federal poverty line is too low (2016). This article argues that the federal poverty line is too low. It’s relevant because the line impacts determinations of eligibility for programs.

Three reasons for a UBI (2017). This article is mostly talking about developing countries but it argues that a UBI can sustain social cohesion and help transition to a world of unemployment caused by automation.

Modeling the macreconomic effects of a UBI (2019) How would a massive federal spending program like a universal basic income (UBI) affect the macroeconomy? We use the Levy Institute macroeconometric model to estimate the impact of three versions of such an unconditional cash assistance program over an eight-year time horizon. Overall, we find that the economy can not only withstand large increases in federal spending, but could also grow thanks to the stimulative effects of cash transfers on the economy.

UBII: Is it a good idea? (2019). This article discusses the major UBI proposals, their advocates, and the Pros and Cons. It does ultimately conclude that a UBI that works is too expensive and that it is only feasible in a world where there is already a change in societal attitudes that support the poor.

UBI as a Policy Response to Current Challenges (2019) Abstract: We briefly review the main motivations behind recent calls for a Universal Basic Income (UBI) in the United States and the main features of some current UBI proposals. We then argue that a UBI would be extremely expensive and yet do very little to reduce inequality or advance opportunity and social mobility. We argue that instead of a UBI, the federal government should pursue a pro-work strategy of income support, paying wage subsidies to low-wage workers along with targeted transfer benefits consisting of both cash and near-cash types of support paid to the most needy individuals and households.